John MacFarlane wrote:
1. Nobody has written the LaTeX -> MathML code yet, and I've been too
lazy. Anyone who is interested in doing this should get in touch.
Well, I'd certainly be "interested". I use mathematics *a lot* in my
writing. Presumably modifying a large program like Pandoc is intractably
difficult though?
Just write a separate library that parses LaTeX input and returns MathML
output. Pandoc could then use this library. So you wouldn't need to know
anything about pandoc's internals. Just write a function
teXMathToMathML :: String -> String.
This would be a great contribution! You could get a head start by
looking at the LaTeXMathML.js code.
OK. I'll give that a go at some point...
I think it makes good sense to use LaTeX, which is already designed to
be natural but flexible, and is already known by most mathematicians.
Seems like a valid argument.
My guess is that in designing a more natural format, one would
eventually reinvent something like LaTeX...
I would dispute that. I don't think anybody will claim that
"\DeclareMathOperator{\erf}{erf}" is natural or intuitive, nor the
low-level trickery required to correctly typeset arrays and so forth.
(Look at how LaTeX typesets tables. Now look at how Markdown does it. Yeah.)
Even so, designing something better is probably a research project
[since typeset mathematics uses *so* many obscure symbols and advanced
typesetting conventions, and ASCII is woefully unable to cope]. Using
LaTeX is probably a very useful step in the right direction.
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
